move less and eat less

It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.

Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.


Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.


Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!

I'm sorry but this makes absolutely no sense at all...

I'll save you some time and face palming….OP erroneously assumed that the people who are not seeing results and happen to work out more than 3 times per week are overtraining and not giving their bodies time to heal, completely disregarding that people can work out more than 3 times per week without having a crazy workout regimen and that there are other factors besides exercise that can explain a lack of results. Several people, including myself, pointed out to him that we were exercising more than 3 times per week and were fine, at which point we were called stubborn and told we were doing it wrong and his way was better (just because he said so). Also SCIENCE was written a bunch of times in all caps, but no actual science was produced to back these claims. Science was produced to refute the claims but not surprisingly was summarily ignored.

Hilarity, eye rolling, and face palming ensued for several pages, and now we're at the point where the OP is admitting that his original post was worded badly, yet is still arguing that his way is right. Or something. Just nod, smile, and keep doing what you're doing.

Huh? Re-reading my OP, it seems I LITERALLY did not assume someone hitting a plateau is working more than 3 times a day, which explains why I phrase it AS A QUESTION. WITH A QUESTION MARK AT THE END.



I'll go further and say that for some people, 3 times might be TOO MUCH if the GOAL is to PROGRESS AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE.


And no, it's not all face palming in the thread. Quite a few people got it, and one particularly astute person wondered why this even needs to be said. And my answer is, because it's a remarkably common cognitive distortion.

One "astute" person - because they agreed with you.

And you just ignored the rest.

Actually I responded. And I count more than one . One helpful person even helped me craft a better statement.


Thanks for playing though! Your emotions and how important they are have been duly noted.

Your just digging a bigger hole. Nothing wrong with admitting you were wrong and on the contrary, it how we learn, but I doubt that is in your DNA.

It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.

Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.


Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.


Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!

I'm sorry but this makes absolutely no sense at all...

I'll save you some time and face palming….OP erroneously assumed that the people who are not seeing results and happen to work out more than 3 times per week are overtraining and not giving their bodies time to heal, completely disregarding that people can work out more than 3 times per week without having a crazy workout regimen and that there are other factors besides exercise that can explain a lack of results. Several people, including myself, pointed out to him that we were exercising more than 3 times per week and were fine, at which point we were called stubborn and told we were doing it wrong and his way was better (just because he said so). Also SCIENCE was written a bunch of times in all caps, but no actual science was produced to back these claims. Science was produced to refute the claims but not surprisingly was summarily ignored.

Hilarity, eye rolling, and face palming ensued for several pages, and now we're at the point where the OP is admitting that his original post was worded badly, yet is still arguing that his way is right. Or something. Just nod, smile, and keep doing what you're doing.

Huh? Re-reading my OP, it seems I LITERALLY did not assume someone hitting a plateau is working more than 3 times a day, which explains why I phrase it AS A QUESTION. WITH A QUESTION MARK AT THE END.



I'll go further and say that for some people, 3 times might be TOO MUCH if the GOAL is to PROGRESS AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE.


And no, it's not all face palming in the thread. Quite a few people got it, and one particularly astute person wondered why this even needs to be said. And my answer is, because it's a remarkably common cognitive distortion.

One "astute" person - because they agreed with you.

And you just ignored the rest.

Actually I responded. And I count more than one . One helpful person even helped me craft a better statement.


Thanks for playing though! Your emotions and how important they are have been duly noted.

You never answered me why you experience is proof, but mine is not.

Yeah, sorry for the snub. What can I say, lots of negative replies and I answered the most compelling ones. I'm sorry your super special reply didn't get the super special attention it deserved.

I dropped over 30lbs, 2 minutes per mile off my average pace, 6 minutes of my 5k pace and PR'd a half marathon in 4 months of doing the exact opposite of what you are saying - as I mentioned in this thread, working out with weights 4-5 times a week, and cardio 6-7 times a week (depending on where I was in my program). Before and afters are in my profile. Not compelling enough to warrant a response, just an outright dimissal that my experience isn't proof.

The plural of "anecdote" is not data.


you tossed out a half formed theory, and then got nasty with anyone who called you on it.

Here's a tip: Argue less, workout more. It's good for you.

I dropped over 50 in less than a year, did two bulking and cutting phases from there, and also made huge gains in strength, speed and endurance.

It's not evidence for or against the points in my OP, which is why I don't bring it up, and why you shouldn't either. It IS evidence that what I have to say comes from a context of success.

Of course, that stops nobody from coming here and implying I support my points with anecdotal evidence. Which leaves me in the curious position of having you criticize me for blowing off your anecdote, while someone else criticizes me for relying on anecdotal evidence.


Oh yeah, and while I simultaneously am criticized for two points I didn't make, someone else criticizes me for complaining about these dueling straw men.

If you cant figure out why I brought it up, then I give up.

I am not for anectodal evidence either, but if you are going to use yours as evidence, you can't just dismiss others who choose to share theirs (and insult as well).

As a "newbie" that's been using MFP since Jan 1st, I'm still new to all of this... But I think I'd rather work out a few times a week (not overly work out, as I couldn't sustain that and would give up), as it's not all about weight loss. It's about leading a healthier lifestyle, is it not?

I'd rather lose weight slowly, whilst building up my overall fitness and making my body, heart and the rest healthier, fitter and stronger... Or am I just getting the completely wrong end of the stick and doing the wrong thing?

If they had been logging incorrectly, then they wouldn't have lost weight when they increased calories.

In my opinion this is not necessarily correct. Often times, increasing calories can increase dietary compliance and adherence in the long term. So for example many times people make an attempt at setting intake too low. They comply for a few days then they make up for it by having a binge day or a "I'm not going to track today" day and effectively un-do the deficit they may have created over the short periods of compliance.

I actually had not thought of it this way. When they increase calories, they find it easier to keep at it. I feel really fortunate that I found the right info early on and didn't struggle so much with the lower calorie thing.